From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-Dev <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Implementing incremental backup |
Date: | 2013-06-19 21:20:21 |
Message-ID: | 20130619212021.GV23363@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Claudio Freire (klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> I don't see how this is better than snapshotting at the filesystem
> level. I have no experience with TB scale databases (I've been limited
> to only hundreds of GB), but from my limited mid-size db experience,
> filesystem snapshotting is pretty much the same thing you propose
> there (xfs_freeze), and it works pretty well. There's even automated
> tools to do that, like bacula, and they can handle incremental
> snapshots.
Large databases tend to have multiple filesystems and getting a single,
consistent, snapshot across all of them while under load is..
'challenging'. It's fine if you use pg_start/stop_backup() and you're
saving the XLOGs off, but if you can't do that..
Thanks,
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2013-06-19 21:50:07 | Re: Git-master regression failure |
Previous Message | Cédric Villemain | 2013-06-19 21:01:28 | Re: [PATCH] Remove useless USE_PGXS support in contrib |